Day: May 2, 2021

“TO ME”

Here’s my attempted “Intentful”  mindset:

 

To me:

Be careful not to live by or be identified by a *narrative* of the past-whether or not your narrative is true, partially true or a lie. Your life’s narrative is a past thing  up to this second which is now past. We are all going forward.  We are not stuck in the past, physically or time wise. I am not in anyway dismissing our memories nor am I taking away the Holy, i.e., our childhood remembrances, first kiss, graduation, etc… I am only stating that your memories are snapshots from which a ‘meaning’ is formed. Dangerously, this meaning can take shape in the form of a relativistic narrative. This narrative can be altered, persuaded, used and abused depending upon your present abilities to reason out what you have set before you—-that is, your ‘life’ as you are trying to define it and the barrage of ‘advice’ and persuasion that is constantly being tossed at you. You are constantly reminded that your  life needs ‘to fit’ somehow. It needs to make something more of itself than a dissonance amongst chaos. As Rush states, “Be cool or be cast out— subdivisions”

Be brave and use your history to see “WHERE” you were and are in order to calibrate your intended bullseye. Therefore, don’t blame the tools that shaped you, only be thankful for them. Isn’t this a mindset of a good Intender? Isn’t this a hopeful, meaningful, intentful mindset?

Forgive the world. Forgive yourself. Don’t hold anyone to your charge, lest you be charged.

Next is my flippancy towards today’s modern Relativism, a.k.a. NON-SENSE :

“Alright, Kyle Jones, now go address your PTSD, BPS axis 1 with EMDR, Psychiatrists, and endless addressment to the tools of time that shaped my ‘ugliness’ to that which  is ‘uniform’ and ‘healthy’ by today’s standard. Just go ‘work out’ your past—-because it was ‘tampered with’ and not intended. Eliminate the “god factor”, God nor god would do that…if there is one. Do not most Christians believe that God only wants ‘what’s best’ for you…therefore, doesn’t that mean ‘health and wealth’? Kyle, this is your supervening ‘doctor’ speaking, there is no INTENT but your ‘free will’. You can will freely. Right? You’re ‘rogue’ in this sense. But we won’t address that as a problem of semantics, let’s just gloss over that term, “free” and “will” as a cocktail to mean whatever you think. Words are really utilized for a higher pragmatism now. You shouldn’t think about words so much. Words need to be forgotten to their historical meaning and applied to the new Orwellian dictionary for utilitarianism. Forget where words came from and where they are going. Just be ‘beautiful’ to the practical world of today, y’know, the “US AND THEM world that fits the ‘cosmos’ of pragmatism. Your retraining of your ‘damaged’ mind requires only reaction vs. response retraining. Responding, well, it’s ‘relative’. Just don’t react to the relativism. To  its own end -though-it refers. A circle upon a circle—-a loop, a ‘ring’. Kyle Jones, don’t you get it? Can’t you just be in the know? —-I mean…i don’t really know what that is but I know it can’t be Grace, belief in Meaning from an Intender. Get what you want out of life. But don’t react, respond. There is no real meaning. So,——whatever you obtain in this life what does it mean or matter? Just look at the world! Aren’t we doing our free will? Aren’t we striving for justice? What’s relativistically ‘right’, aren’t differentiations between races and spectrums of genders what we call for?—-yet, don’t we hate it when we say ‘you’re different’? We raise flesh up against flesh when we say, “you’re them and we are us”.  When we make ‘alliance’ with any “them” and take *pride* in “us”.  i mean any ‘us/ them’ group has critiqued, judged, made the line. They have distinguished and differentiated. Yes…that’s right, our world is doing just fine!”

 

My view:

This world sucks if I am to refer by, to, of , from it. A world of Aleatoric clauses, i.e., reactions causing more reactions—-hence, the world we see NOW.  Contrawise, a worldview of meaning through Grace in the darkness of hateful reactions, do prove its reality. Not only does Grace prove its reality, it proves that IT is the only way.

To me if there is any grudge, resentment, hatred, blame, etc. from you to others—- then, you will always require human receptacle(s) that will, if acting on the natural impulse, grow weary of being cast in the mould of a god that they can’t fulfill. You will drain everyone and everything around you in the end.  The very things you blame will become you unbeknownst to you.

Not forgiving, living by your traumas,  and making others live by your  traumas—-hence, a world demanded to live on eggshells is cruelty and bullying  There is no achievement in this other than a demand for understanding that which cannot be properly thought out. I have no judgement against these poor people. I could absolutely claim full rights to the same ‘plight’ if I were to live out a narrative in the past and act out “eye for an eye”. I agree, acquiesce, sympathize and empathisize with their problems but this is not to be demanded.

Conclusion for now for me:

Love is a solo endeavor. The ‘world’ of reactions do not, cannot ‘perceive/ discern’ a ‘no-charge-forgiving-gracious belief/ lifestyle.

 

To me, an instruction:

Do not react with the reactions.  Be a grown up, give grace. Grace is the opposite of this warring world that DEMANDS its damnation upon others. If you have any hatred in your mind that envisions the elimination of someone, adultery, desire to have what others have that you don’t——you are guilty of those things in the primary world.////IDEAS have consequences and our world, our nation is a result of our IDEAS.  Is GRACE in your imagination, inner thoughts, every thought? If it is not, then you, me, all of us are in danger of Judging.

Our world is reflecting where we are going in our hearts.

P.S. —-Knowing the ‘result’ of our evolution, we have so many illnesses, whether mental and/ or physical. Take your meds that ail the organs….do due diligence (to love your fellow humans) to keep your body healthy…but to what end?—-To healthily serve others with GRACE, no self based faulty judgements that are desirous to apportion condemnation while not addressing your multitude of errors worthy of worse damnations <—-i.e., ‘critiques, punishments, analysis, dismissals, etc. We are not ‘stative’ creatures. We are being pressed forward by time. Don’t waste time. Think on these things and private message me my errors and/or your inspiration. Please don’t post vitriolic statements on my page. This is your legal right but it is my right to block hateful and ignorant judgements.  With that said, ask God to be as HIS SON is: an infinite receptacle for other’s pain.  Hold , coddle, listen to those who coo and cry— for we do the same.  My intention is to agape others.

Lastly, forgive the ‘roughness’ of this post, grammar, halts, brokenness, etc….I’m only typing my heart out. Love to you all.  PS.—— are these words in error from the Gospel of Jesus?  If they are then I am wrong where my word derivative from HIS Kingdom’s pathway. There is nothing new under the sun so why are we repeating our errors? It’s because we must learn what Grace is.

TOLKIEN’S FANTASTIC ORTHODOXY- PURE SYNTHESIS VIA ONE MEDIUM: LOGOS

I present to you an idea that has given us a reality that is undeniable.

In this that I present to you, I ‘sutured’ the “extra Christian/ pure heathen” Theology that Tolkien understood through his immense studies to a Biblical-exegetical platform. In this paper, I will sometimes use Biblical and Tolkenian terms interchangeably to show the ‘trueness’ of Tolkien’s philological exercise within his writings. As a linguist and a Theologian, I find Tolkien’s writings to be more “orthodox” than most “orthodoxies” I have studied. Mainly, Tolkien was a believer in LOGOS, as Christ, the Narrative, the history of the words by which support the Narrative and return to their semiotic relation to LOGOS. There was, is, will always be only ONE TRUE STORY.

Though Tolkien did not do allegory or make political notions in his writings, he was adamant about the danger of slovenly approaches to philology. For sure, communism, fascism, bad socialism necessitated an Orwellian “speech” that allowed for the disenfranchisement of mind to word to social effect and the reconditioning to ‘function’ without semiotics of self expression, one to another. Therefore, it is obvious to me that utilitarianism begs for philological indifference. This is not a new system, but an old one. Such key – code relationships of language that give power to the Monarch did just this very thing. Such a story alludes to Babel, “Let us make us a Shem (one language for “order”) *lest we be ‘scattered abroad’ “. Unification through a type of speech which has not naturally ‘come to be’ begs the question, “who is attempting to make the “new logos”? This is where “nature, Ea, cosmos, Logos” shows themselves to be our guiding friends.

As “The Ring” circles back on itself, it refers only to itself. It’s purposes might be needed but only to serve. When one is bound in ‘circular-self referring logic’ …one can only do what one is limited to do. The Buddhist “Nirvana” gives us that idea that “we are that”—-i.e., we are our own gods, we reference ourselves, etc. Isn’t this a hell to think that ‘you are it’? That this is all there is to the answer of life and meaning? As to the ‘ONE RING BINDS THEM ALL’ —-we have the total sum of Dark Shadow logic laid out by Sauron, a type of Melkor/ Satan. That is, whoever can ‘bind all’ with a self referenced/ relativistic/ circular motioning cycle wins all. In theory, the fight is over. If “all” *speak* the new language by which utilitarianism to the highest order and know only their ‘limitations as free will’ then, they can act ONLY on their repetitions which give only the same reason. There would be no other theme to take them ‘out’ of such a conundrum. This is what Tolkien inevitably was guided by WORD and Narration to write. IT addressed the world as to the imminent dangers of philological disenfranchisement and the sequential dispositions to fall into a pragmatic function to the bigger brother, will of another, …..Shadow Logic.

In contrast to utilitarianism via ‘pragmatic approach’ to the Primary World, the opposite case concerning the freedom to be ONE and express uniquely is solely a God to humankind condition. We see the freedom as did the Ainur to subcreate from the authority of the infinite strings of their Creator God. As I will state later, the Ainur, as well as us with God, are “Free” to act the more we are bound on the infinite strings of God. The less we are of our limitations and repetitive unfounded natures that have their termination, the more we can “act” on infinity with the Infinite God who created ALL POSSIBILITIES.

ANOTHER BIBLICAL PARALLEL

Theological question: If you sin in the secondary world, what would the consequences be to the written character and the author who holds the pen? Who sinned? What err was there? What does erasure, dismissal, and ‘hatred’ mean? Is judgement therefore abolished and the character written anew in the Image of the Author?

My interpretation and quoting of Mark 10:27: Jesus had just established the limitations/ the impossibilities of man to enter into heaven due to his sin, not just in the physical act, but maybe more importantly, the mind – i.e.,Tolkien’s Secondary World. The apostles then asked Jesus, “Then, who can be saved —-if man, the written character in the play by the Author, cannot make the effort to strive into heaven by his illusory ‘free will’ ?” Jesus said, “With men’s illusory will it is impossible but with GOD all things are possible.

Illuvatar told Melkor (the Prince Satan) that he, Melkor, would fulfill a more beautiful design for Illuvatar even if Melkor thought he was doing his will against Illuvatar. That Melkor would THEN become more heightened to ‘his will’ not being existent. This is “hell” for the rebellious creature. Hell is only found in the predestinated ‘striving’ of their will against the Prime Maker. Is this not a Theological point that surpasses the rigid and judgemental-non-gracious “predeterminism” of Calvinism?! There is still love found in Illuvatar’s voice while HIS instructions are True and HIS Theocracy stated firmly. This is also the opposite of “judgement” against those who do not the will of Illuvatar (GOD). Rather, “the Design” is expressed is Illuvatar’s statement: “THAT ALL MAY KNOW WHO ILLUVATAR IS”. This is where I believe George MacDonald’s “Christ centered death for ALL” comes into play: *Only malice shall go to hell, not the one for whom malice lived it’s life out upon until Illuvatar’s (GOD’s) WILL was DONE* EA!!! = “Let it Be” = Yah.

WAS TOLKIEN’S WORK AN EXTRA CHRISTIAN THEOLOGICAL TREATISE OR A WASTE OF TIME?

 The questions might arise, “why would I waste my time on ‘fiction’? I’m too busy with the ‘real’ world, so, how could I possibly have the time to embark on a child’s occupation? What is key here is the question: ‘what kind of Fantasy’, or, ‘how do you define Tolkien’s Fantasy world?’

The answer lies in the root or cause by which true Fantasy can be upheld.

Tolkien knew that the classical sense for “word (logos)”, —as ‘classifier’, ‘categorizer’, ‘organizer’ and the suffixial “—ology”— , which could be technically be identified as LOGOS, VERBUM or WORD. All 3 of these terms carried with them a corresponding and consequential Narrative. WORD, by Tolkien’s meaning, must be taken in the infinitive, more or less, due to its ‘out of tempo’ and ‘non-spatiality’ sense. Contradistinctive to WORD, the NARRATIVE expresses the ‘reeling out’ of the WORD (which was already ‘done’) into limited tempo and limited space for “the Story” and its meaningful end. The “NARRATIVE” IS the WORD in time and space—-meaning, the NARRATIVE IS HOLY AND WITHOUT CONTRADICTION.

It is this TYPE of LOGOS that rectified the Reasons for the Biblical Old Testament, the Reprise from the letter of the law, the ensample by which we must follow unto death-though we are incapable of fulfilling Christ’s title, and the “SENSE” that Europe received from the Gospels, ordering out even the pagan’s hope of an *a-moral* Pagan God that has now come. SO, not JUST to the JEWS, but to the minds of the heathen (the Ethnos), did Jesus Christ make “SENSE” to them and by the SENSE could there be hope here and after this life.

Tolkien, as some writers have said, was a ‘true pagan’ Pagan, by root definition means, “page”—-“on another page; over there; past the *peg* by which you should take heed before crossing into”. He was a Christian, a Roman Catholic, and, without insult and only praise—a true pagan. Tolkien observed the Heathen and their archetypes for meaning. Tolkien knew how to thread the Christian Hope, the Christian Reality with the Heathen’s Hope and their Realities. Tolkien saw ALL things as ONE big Gospel that could only be held in a presentable substance called “EA”. Otherwise, all such *ideas* are left up to endless debates. EA allowed for the walls to come down and to see with clarity the unfolding and unfolded NATURE of Illuvatar (GOD). A true amalgam, all which pointed to the Christ idea, had been codified and delivered post Mortem thanks to J.R.R.’s son, Christopher, who finalized the Silmarillion for his father using his father’s notes, histories, and a little savvy that Christopher had acquired from knowing his ingenious father.

CONCLUSION: WITHOUT ‘EA’, WE COULD NOT HAVE A PRESENTABLE THEOLOGY WITHOUT WALLS. TOLKIEN’S THEOLOGY WITHIN THE SECONDARY WORLD WAS ‘CHRISTIAN’ BEFORE ‘CHRISTIANITY’ WAS A RELIGION

In Colossians 1:17 it states, “He (Jesus Christ) is before all things, and in Him ALL (Greek: “panta” – literally, ‘everything’) things hold together”. It is ‘soft algebra’ to replace Jesus Christ with WORD here (as did John the Beloved when he tells us in John 1:1-ff “that the WORD *became* flesh and dwelt amongst us” What was the WORD before *it became*? It is not a question but an Archimedean Greek ‘heureka’ moment (“I have found it!”) to see the pattern by which Tolkien was forced to follow—- the formula from which the WORD (All/ Done/ IS/ Yah) became (engeneto) the actuation-Jesus, then to CHRIST (fulfiller and complete) to WORD to Christ again, ….all being in ‘agreement’ a-tempo, tempo, spatial, or non-spatial. For no literary mechanism can alter the consistency and force of WORD or LOGOS (being the same). Therefore, is Jesus not the NARRATION and is not the WORD actually Jesus in HIS Pre-incarnate existence in eternity? Shall HE not return again as HE said HE would? I believe that Tolkien’s entire works proved the force of LOGOS. I believe Tolkien’s works were an ‘extra Christian’ theological treatise. I feel that Tolkien drew from nearly limitless sources in order to show that there is no order but LOGOS. I believe that Tolkien’s Narrative, in full, FORCES us to reckon our sights on a Christ figure, types, shadows, that emerge through the distilling process of pure philology. Such was his work, I believe.